Officiating - A Completely Different Perspective

Okay, I may be in the minority here, but I decided to have a quick look at the number of a powerplays each team has had so far in the playoffs (after reading about Washington going 1 for 30 so far). Here are the results:

DET - 28
PHX - 28

VAN - 24
LAK - 26

COL - 15
SJS - 26

CHI - 23
NSH - 27

WSH - 30
MON - 27

PIT - 28
OTT - 22

NJD - 32
PHI - 29

BOS - 22
BUF - 19

Funny all the series have had relatively the same number of penalties called (24-30 range). The NJD-PHI is a bit out of wack as they only played 5 games, but that's not entirely surprising as PHI is a bit of chippy team. So, my concern is as follows: If you look at each series, the powerplay opportunities for each team are very, very similar, with the exception of SJS-COL, not sure why that is so out of wack, but I suspect it is probably from a particular game or something and not even across the entire series (could be though).

You may be asking....so what, looks relatively even for all the teams...what's the beef? Well, I look at it like this: do we really think each team is committing the same number of infractions? I guess on average is should make some sense, but I think it is too even. There is no conspiracy here or anything, I'm just not a fan of the way the officials operate and have been operating for years, and it goes like this:

- Team A has taken 3 penalties in a row....you know there is no way they are getting the next penalty and the slightest thing Team B does will result in a call (even up). My philosphy: I don't care if one team gets 15 penalties in a row, if they are deserved, they should be called. A game can result in 15 powerplays for one team and 2 for the other, doesn't mean the reffing was bad, but more often than not, the number of PP for each team will tend to even up.

Okay, I may be in the minority here, but I decided to have a quick look at the number of a powerplays each team has had so far in the playoffs (after reading about Washington going 1 for 30 so far). Here are the results:

DET - 28PHX - 28

VAN - 24LAK - 26

COL - 15SJS - 26

CHI - 23NSH - 27

WSH - 30MON - 27

PIT - 28OTT - 22

NJD - 32PHI - 29

BOS - 22BUF - 19

Funny all the series have had relatively the same number of penalties called (24-30 range). The NJD-PHI is a bit out of wack as they only played 5 games, but that's not entirely surprising as PHI is a bit of chippy team. So, my concern is as follows: If you look at each series, the powerplay opportunities for each team are very, very similar, with the exception of SJS-COL, not sure why that is so out of wack, but I suspect it is probably from a particular game or something and not even across the entire series (could be though).

You may be asking....so what, looks relatively even for all the teams...what's the beef? Well, I look at it like this: do we really think each team is committing the same number of infractions? I guess on average is should make some sense, but I think it is too even. There is no conspiracy here or anything, I'm just not a fan of the way the officials operate and have been operating for years, and it goes like this:

- Team A has taken 3 penalties in a row....you know there is no way they are getting the next penalty and the slightest thing Team B does will result in a call (even up). My philosphy: I don't care if one team gets 15 penalties in a row, if they are deserved, they should be called. A game can result in 15 powerplays for one team and 2 for the other, doesn't mean the reffing was bad, but more often than not, the number of PP for each team will tend to even up.

I could not agree more!

This has been one of my biggest problems with the league for a long time... it's just one of the many inconsistencies that make it a fringe sport and not a powerhouse... new fans can't follow it, because they'll be like "wait, I thought that was a penalty" or "wait, I thought that was ok" and you have to respond, dejected... "yes... it's the mickey mouse way the league is run..." and instantly it loses credibility...

I agree with you. Seeing fans complaining about how the last X number of calls have gone against their team or how the power play opportunities in a given game or series are imbalanced, and using this to try and imply some sort of bias, is obnoxious. The goal is not to give both teams an equal number of advantages, but penalize a team whenever they commit an infraction, no matter how many more that might be than their opposition.

But I guess fans don't get so much of an opportunity to complain about the above as you have showed the PPs trending towards equal in most series. You know refs try to even up the calls, and late in a game if a team is losing by a goal or two that the majority of the time the next ticky-tack call is going their way.

"We've been in the same spot all year long. We won 50 games for the fourth year in a row. People think we're just hum-drum and boring. No, you know what we are, we're good. You can't do what we do every single day and not be good." - Mike Babcock

Be careful what you wish for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but being LGW, there tends to be a bit of bias here in the thinking that the Wings would benefit from a different style of officiating.

Personally, it's an assumption, and a bad one to think that the Wings aren't one of the teams that commits alot of uncalled penalties. The cold, hard truth is that we get away with more obstruction than any other team in the league. Watch any game, our defenders interfered with forecheckers more often, and for split seconds longer than any other team i've ever watched.

To our credit, we've made a science of it. It's not a mystery. It's well known throughout the league that we obstruct quite a bit.

The problem as I see it is that other teams commit what I would call blatant, roughing style penalties against us that don't get called. How many times do you see a Wings player take a late pop to the kisser or get his helmet ripped off or something and there's no call. That stuff pizzes us off and makes us believe we should be the recipients of 4 or 5 more PP's per game.

What you don't see, or what your eyes tend to overlook, are the subtle interference plays we run all over the ice, especially from our defensive blueline to 10 feet into the defensive zone.

We've made it an artform but we get away with lots and lots of it. I'm surprised and thankful that the refs allow it to happen.

Do all teams commit the same number of penalties? Not always. But I would venture a guess that if you added up all the missed calls both ways, the numbers would still look relatively the same so much ado about nothing IMO.

OK guys, after watching hockey for several years now, this is how I see NHL officiating works.

Throughout the course of a game, there are many, many instances of infractions that can be called "penalties". Small hooks, holds, slashes, interference, etc., events that happen all the time, to different degrees, slight to obvious. Since hockey is such a fast sport, some of these aren't seen by the refs, but then again many of them are.

The refs have come to let many of these go, or else the game would become a joke with so many penalties called. They only call those penalties that are either A) very obvious (plays that are the focus of everyone's attention and that would make them look totally rediculous if it's not called. This includes plays resulting in injuries), or B) very distinctly give the team committing the penalty a real possibility to score or a distinct positional advantage.

Along with this, there is indeed an "evening out" of penalties mindset that's in play, where if one team is getting all the powerplays, that team will get the ref's more acute focus on the many infractions they are committing in particular (and less focus on the other team's infractions being committed). Thus, penalities will very much even out over the course of a game. Refs obviously do this to give the impression of no favoritism or bias. This is why you see "chincy" calls happen on infractions that occur dozens of times in the game anyway.

So, in essence, penalties are random events driven by A) and B) above, but overall are called somewhat randomly and with an eye towards being equal to both teams whether they commit them equally or not. This is how I see penalty calls, and now I rarely sweat a call and when it happens I just figure that "it's time for a call for so-and-so team"

Edited by Quadnational, 27 April 2010 - 11:17 AM.

"Just too strong for us, our top players were not even close to them, not even close. We couldn't make a damn pass. It's like they were playing against kids."Minnesota coach Jacques Lemaire commenting on the Red Wings after they beat his team 5-0

Okay, I may be in the minority here, but I decided to have a quick look at the number of a powerplays each team has had so far in the playoffs (after reading about Washington going 1 for 30 so far). Here are the results:

DET - 28PHX - 28

VAN - 24LAK - 26

COL - 15SJS - 26

CHI - 23NSH - 27

WSH - 30MON - 27

PIT - 28OTT - 22

NJD - 32PHI - 29

BOS - 22BUF - 19

Funny all the series have had relatively the same number of penalties called (24-30 range). The NJD-PHI is a bit out of wack as they only played 5 games, but that's not entirely surprising as PHI is a bit of chippy team. So, my concern is as follows: If you look at each series, the powerplay opportunities for each team are very, very similar, with the exception of SJS-COL, not sure why that is so out of wack, but I suspect it is probably from a particular game or something and not even across the entire series (could be though).

You may be asking....so what, looks relatively even for all the teams...what's the beef? Well, I look at it like this: do we really think each team is committing the same number of infractions? I guess on average is should make some sense, but I think it is too even. There is no conspiracy here or anything, I'm just not a fan of the way the officials operate and have been operating for years, and it goes like this:

- Team A has taken 3 penalties in a row....you know there is no way they are getting the next penalty and the slightest thing Team B does will result in a call (even up). My philosphy: I don't care if one team gets 15 penalties in a row, if they are deserved, they should be called. A game can result in 15 powerplays for one team and 2 for the other, doesn't mean the reffing was bad, but more often than not, the number of PP for each team will tend to even up.

Great post! This is one of the things that really bothers me about the league. One team will mug the other and somehow the PP try's will be even or sometimes the mugging team will actually get more. It's completely retarded. I also hate how the other team can put a Wing on his ass in front of the net all game long and the minute the Wings do it it's straight to the box. I'm starting to think you can only play physical if your from the north, like only northern people know how to crosscheck and face wash? It's a real conundrum.

Edited by Pucks, 27 April 2010 - 11:29 AM.

Welcome to the playoffs....where the games get better and the officiating gets worse.

Agree with all sentiments, yet I don't think the NHL will do anything about it. There are a ton of things about officiating that don't make sense to me.

Another one that gets me is how they base a penalty decision on the severity of the reaction or injury of the player getting hit, instead of on the viciousness of the hit itself. Key example recently are the Hossa vs Ovechkin hits.

What if a player has a history of injuries and gets hurt on a play? The person who hits him has to be responsible for the potential fragility of the player? Or a dirty dangerous hit can be laid on a player who happened to thankfully not get hurt on the play, yet the perpetrator is barely penalized based on reaction.

I guess this means you can't hit guys like Havlat or Gaborik for fear of being suspended based on the fact that they are naturally fragile and prone to injury and re-injury.

While I realize that a lot of the officiating rules are difficult in nature, it just gets to me that sooo many of the NHL's problems could be solved by exercising the simplest form of common sense.

Every sport has rules that "break" the game to a certain degree by leaving things open to interpretation by officials. The NBA basically devolves into a free throw shooting contest after a guy throws himself recklessly at the basket but gets fouled. The NFL has pass interference calls where you can move the ball 30/40 yards down the field after even incidental contact by a cornerback. MLB has the strike zone, which seems to extend a foot or more on either side of the actual plate.

Part of the reason Americans don't like soccer (and many of the same people don't like hockey) is that they turn it on and see officials heavily impacting the results, and players flailing all over the place lobbying for fouls. In the NHL, there's no question that penalties are used to "tell a story". Which isn't to say that the refs are being dishonest, but that there is this huge assortment of "unwritten rules" that kind of plays into the narrative of a hockey game.

If you have a super-aggressive game with tons of roughing, fights, etc., the run-of-the-mill holding or obstruction calls might be overlooked. I call this "Anaheim" effect...2007 Anaheim got away with tons of penalties that Pavel Datsyuk would never get away with b/c the refs know that over the course of the game, they're already going to be calling tons of penalties for much worse infractions. In their minds, if they call every penalty they see, Anaheim would have had like 20 penalties per game, so they feel like they're dictating an outcome simply by applying the rules. Of course, if they actually did call 20 penalties on Anaheim, they would probably have to adjust their tactics and not play like that, which is why it's unfortunate that this goes on.

Okay, I may be in the minority here, but I decided to have a quick look at the number of a powerplays each team has had so far in the playoffs (after reading about Washington going 1 for 30 so far). Here are the results:

DET - 28PHX - 28

VAN - 24LAK - 26

COL - 15SJS - 26

CHI - 23NSH - 27

WSH - 30MON - 27

PIT - 28OTT - 22

NJD - 32PHI - 29

BOS - 22BUF - 19

Funny all the series have had relatively the same number of penalties called (24-30 range). The NJD-PHI is a bit out of wack as they only played 5 games, but that's not entirely surprising as PHI is a bit of chippy team. So, my concern is as follows: If you look at each series, the powerplay opportunities for each team are very, very similar, with the exception of SJS-COL, not sure why that is so out of wack, but I suspect it is probably from a particular game or something and not even across the entire series (could be though).

You may be asking....so what, looks relatively even for all the teams...what's the beef? Well, I look at it like this: do we really think each team is committing the same number of infractions? I guess on average is should make some sense, but I think it is too even. ...

If they were all exactly the same, or within say 1 or 2, or every game featured identical (or almost) penalties for both teams, this would be more credible.

But this is really what should be expected. For the most part, the series's and games have been pretty close. These are all NHL players pretty much always trying to avoid taking penalties. It makes sense that most would result in fairly even penalties. You even have your exception in SJ, and even Pitt isn't that close.

Of course, we all know 'make-up calls' exist. We also know that the officiating is pretty consistently terrible. But they're terrible both ways.

Agree with all sentiments, yet I don't think the NHL will do anything about it. There are a ton of things about officiating that don't make sense to me.

Another one that gets me is how they base a penalty decision on the severity of the reaction or injury of the player getting hit, instead of on the viciousness of the hit itself. Key example recently are the Hossa vs Ovechkin hits.

What if a player has a history of injuries and gets hurt on a play? The person who hits him has to be responsible for the potential fragility of the player? Or a dirty dangerous hit can be laid on a player who happened to thankfully not get hurt on the play, yet the perpetrator is barely penalized based on reaction.

I guess this means you can't hit guys like Havlat or Gaborik for fear of being suspended based on the fact that they are naturally fragile and prone to injury and re-injury.

While I realize that a lot of the officiating rules are difficult in nature, it just gets to me that sooo many of the NHL's problems could be solved by exercising the simplest form of common sense.

I agree with that, and I think that player reputation and history should be taken into account when considering suspensions and other discipline, but it has no place on the ice in determining whether or not a play was a black-and-white tripping infraction or roughing.

But the worst problem is the "results-based" punishment that the refs try to use. Obviously, if you can see that a guy is injured (or bleeding, by rule), that may be used to increase the level of penalty. But take that Shane Doan hit on Kronwall at center ice earlier in the series. The VS. commentators were basically pleasuring themselves over it: "Oh, look at that tough play by the captain". But it was a blind side hit. The puck was nowhere to be found. At the very least, it should've been a 2 minute obstruction call.

Now suppose that Kronwall hits his head on the ice like Booth did on the Richards hit, and is out for the playoffs. Suddenly, we're taking that same set of facts, replaying the tape, talking about Doan as a dirty player, and probably suspending him. But the fact that Kronwall did or didn't get injured on the play has more to do with physics and luck than anything Doan did.

Agree with the OP. The most frustrating part is watching a game even out on the PP just for the sake of perceived parity. If one team deserves more penalties, they should get them. This is how the Ducks have played for years, basically they can only get penalized so much, keep toeing the line and everything will eventually be let go. A penalty in the first period should be a penalty in the third period, and vise versa.

The inconsistency is the most irritating part of NHL officiating, i.e. the Hal Gill rule in which holding up a player like a pass protecting NFL lineman is interference UNLESS Hal Gill does it. Its silly to think about, but refs are all too aware of the penalty count and even more aware of a players tendencies leading to some excusing penalties because a player like Gill has ridiculous size or calling others because no matter what their eyes tell their brain, their brain says Holmstrom stabbed the goaltender. Ideally, they wouldn't have human referees, they would have indiscriminate robot penalty measurement devices which call a spade a spade everytime, and at the very least the human refs could do a much better job of taking on that mindset. Until that happens, the NHL officiating will continue to be a joke, rules will be enforced and not enforced and rescinded in a whimsical fashion, diluting the feeling that Team X won because Team X deserved to win.

This has been one of my biggest problems with the league for a long time... it's just one of the many inconsistencies that make it a fringe sport and not a powerhouse... new fans can't follow it, because they'll be like "wait, I thought that was a penalty" or "wait, I thought that was ok" and you have to respond, dejected... "yes... it's the mickey mouse way the league is run..." and instantly it loses credibility...

yup...it's unfortunate that penalty calling is like the salary cap, there's a ceiling.the best team and the team that plays within the rules the best doesn't always benefit because the NHL has what's called "the even up call". it doesn't go unnoticed by the announcers either. there's numerous blatant penalties that get called on one team, followed by a softie against the other team.

i guess that's what makes cashing in on the early opportunities so important...something which the wings failed miserably at doing last game.

regardless, your guys points are very valid and the NHL will not change for the better in anyu way until bettman is a thing of the past. the rule book is suited for bettman to control.

Every sport has rules that "break" the game to a certain degree by leaving things open to interpretation by officials. The NBA basically devolves into a free throw shooting contest after a guy throws himself recklessly at the basket but gets fouled. The NFL has pass interference calls where you can move the ball 30/40 yards down the field after even incidental contact by a cornerback. MLB has the strike zone, which seems to extend a foot or more on either side of the actual plate.

Part of the reason Americans don't like soccer (and many of the same people don't like hockey) is that they turn it on and see officials heavily impacting the results, and players flailing all over the place lobbying for fouls. In the NHL, there's no question that penalties are used to "tell a story". Which isn't to say that the refs are being dishonest, but that there is this huge assortment of "unwritten rules" that kind of plays into the narrative of a hockey game.

If you have a super-aggressive game with tons of roughing, fights, etc., the run-of-the-mill holding or obstruction calls might be overlooked. I call this "Anaheim" effect...2007 Anaheim got away with tons of penalties that Pavel Datsyuk would never get away with b/c the refs know that over the course of the game, they're already going to be calling tons of penalties for much worse infractions. In their minds, if they call every penalty they see, Anaheim would have had like 20 penalties per game, so they feel like they're dictating an outcome simply by applying the rules. Of course, if they actually did call 20 penalties on Anaheim, they would probably have to adjust their tactics and not play like that, which is why it's unfortunate that this goes on.

i am the last person to cry "conspiracy," but i think there is some merit to what you're saying here. it's honestly a bit like another poster said about the wings doing subtle interference. in the ANA situation, they do blatant roughing and crosschecking infractions because they know that they can commit 20 penalties and get called for five....simply for the reason that if any one team literally had 20 minor penalties in a game, everyone would be screaming their heads off that there was a conspiracy for the opposing team. so you know you can commit 20 penalties and get called for at most five or six. if the opposing team gets one or two goals on the PPs but you prevent or cause three or four more goals by breaking the rules, the ultimate benefit is in your favor.

yup...it's unfortunate that penalty calling is like the salary cap, there's a ceiling.the best team and the team that plays within the rules the best doesn't always benefit because the NHL has what's called "the even up call". it doesn't go unnoticed by the announcers either. there's numerous blatant penalties that get called on one team, followed by a softie against the other team.

i guess that's what makes cashing in on the early opportunities so important...something which the wings failed miserably at doing last game.

regardless, your guys points are very valid and the NHL will not change for the better in anyu way until bettman is a thing of the past. the rule book is suited for bettman to control.

word. a poster in another thread made the point that early powerplays are easier to kill of than late ones -- the PK troops are still fresh. but so are the PP troops, so you can't really call conspiracy because our PPs were "early."

i don't care what anyone says about the fairness of the officiating in game six, we had six straight penalty minutes and ended up a goal in the negative. there's a point where you can absolutely not blame officiating, and you have to say that either a) we are not getting it done, or b) brzy is a top, top notch goalie. personally i'm inclined to go with B, since i see merit in giving credit where credit is due. he would not let pucks get past him, and we couldn't find a way. we could have easily been up 2- or 3-0 at the end of that powerplay sequence. instead we were down 0-1. given that, i accept no bitching about the reffing. we simply have to get it done.

i am the last person to cry "conspiracy," but i think there is some merit to what you're saying here. it's honestly a bit like another poster said about the wings doing subtle interference. in the ANA situation, they do blatant roughing and crosschecking infractions because they know that they can commit 20 penalties and get called for five....simply for the reason that if any one team literally had 20 minor penalties in a game, everyone would be screaming their heads off that there was a conspiracy for the opposing team. so you know you can commit 20 penalties and get called for at most five or six. if the opposing team gets one or two goals on the PPs but you prevent or cause three or four more goals by breaking the rules, the ultimate benefit is in your favor.

.

You've hit the nail on the head. And for the most part, this thread has shown that there's a very good understanding here about how the league operates.

In actuality, the "Anaheim effect" shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. And as another poster said, it has less to do with hockey and more to do with sport in general. Since the invention of sport, players on opposing sides have tried to gain every advantage possible. Take the NFL for instance. The amount of holding and "illegal" stuff that takes place in the trenches simply cannot be called every single play. Either the refs miss some of it or it is such a borderline infraction, that to call it would mean calling all of them and lead to a penalty-fest that would have fans tossing beer bottles onto the field, trying to maim and kill the referees.

Hockey is no different and neither are the Wings. The Anaheim effect or the Philly effect works for them, they commit alot of blatant fouls that one could associate with a rugged or physical style of play. Conversely, the Wings commit a lot of fouls that could be associated with a more positional style of play. And that's exactly what interference is. Trying to illegally impede the progress of an opponent through your positioning. The refs don't call us for every interference infraction b/c to do so would have us in the box 10-15 times per game.

As for the overarching debate that some teams simply take more penalties and therefore nothing else should matter. That a penalty is a penalty and not all teams take the same amount of penalties. Well you know what, they don't. And that bears out in the final statistics. Perhaps the playoffs are skewed because its such a relatively small sample size compared to an 82 game season. But if you look at the regular season tallies, teams obviously take differing amounts of penalties and the teams you'd expect, wish, desire, are absolutely 100% certain should get called for more stuff, do indeed get called for more stuff.

For example, the Devils were a league fewest 239 times short handed. The Wings, much to the surprise of some I would imagine (considering some homers think we get called for everything) were shorthanded the 4th fewest times in the league. Conversely, a rough and tumble team like Philly was the third most short handed team all year. The 2 teams above them didn't make the playoffs. Anaheim finished 7th, another top 10 for those bullies.

For the sake of this series, during the regular season Phoenix was shorthanded 50 MORE TIMES than Detroit. So yes, there's probably something to be said for the playoff effect and refs not wanting to visibly be the reason why a game is decided.

Personally, I don't mind the officiating. Aside from the missed high stick on Lidstrom, i'd say it's been officiated just right. I can say that b/c of all the sighs of relief I have had when I see us get away with something that should've been called.

Bottom line, each team is going to get it's PP chances. Which team kicked ass on the PP in game 6 and which team blow donkey sack? That's why Phoenix won. Take advantage of your chances. PERIOD.

Bottom line, each team is going to get it's PP chances. Which team kicked ass on the PP in game 6 and which team blow donkey sack? That's why Phoenix won. Take advantage of your chances. PERIOD.

IMO, the bottom line is that there is no reason to be disciplined in this league. That's sad.

Sweet. This dude was brought here for one reason, to punch people in the head - every other thing that he can do, other Wings can do better. I like that we have a head-puncher. The league has other, better head-punchers, but this one is ours. Better than nothing. Good work, Kenny!

The thing I find most troubling about the NHL, and what this thread and PP stats doesn't show, is when and how penalties are given out. You're definitely right that at the end of the day PP opportunities end up being about even which is ludacris in itself. But what is more troubling is the timing of these calls. It's pretty obvious, from reading most ppl's posts here, that we're all in agreement - there are coutnless penalties that occur throughout the game and the refs pick and choose which ones they actually call. This means it's up to their discretion to change the flow and momentum of the game.

If for example tonight the Wings have 3 straight PPs. They're up a goal in the 3rd with 10 minutes to go and are dominating and the refs decide now is a good time to call a marginal penalty against Detroit. At the end of the game the stats will show Det with 3 PP and Pho 1 but the momentum swings are huge. The quality of penalties are huge. Getting a marginal call against you affects players outlooks on what's happening so much more than a deserved penalty. To me it's so much more about the how and when than the actual quantity (since it'll all but be even at the end anyways).

Game 6 on Sunday exemplified this perfectly. The Red Wings got three early consecutive powerplays in a row. I said at the time "they better take advantage of this because they are getting the next eight penalties." Exaggeration obviously somewhat, but it turned out way closer than I expected or wanted. The Red Wings got the next five penalties, four in the second period alone which was the difference in the game. I'm not going to sit here and blame the officiating for the Red Wings poor result. They got what they deserved on Sunday. However, spending half of the period killing penalties is going to have a negative effect on a team's ability to win the game. Everything has to be fair in this league - the salary cap, the number of penalties being called, teams in piss poor hockey markets put on a level playing field while shunning the franchises that keep the NHL afloat.

The Red Wings dominated play in the first period, therefore you expect them to draw more penalties as a result. Well, that only does you good if you score because that hard effort is going to turn around and be called against you at a later point. We don't need penalties to be even - the harder working team deserves to have more chances on the powerplay. It's another failed effort by Bettman to promote close games regardless of the situation.

The same number of PP opportunities is another lame tactic the NHL uses to keep up competitive outcomes of games...as is the how and when penalties are called. Make no mistake about it, refs control the flow and momentum of games. It is to the NHLs benefit to have close, hard fought games and giving trailing teams chances on the PP to get back in games and come from behind exciting victories is exciting for the elague and it's fans.

I'm not saying games are rigging or predetermined or any other conspiracy b.s but if you think for one second that the refs don't control the flow and momentum of games to purposely keep them competitive you're nuts.

One of my best friends is a Blackhawks fan. During the second intermission I texted him, verbatim,"get ready for an onslaught of PK's in the 3rd. Chicago has had way too many PP's in the second for the refs not to even it up with some questionable calls."

Of course it happened, and really the calls against the Blackhawks weren't bad, but it just always plays out this way. Seems dishonest.

However, when we do have a few PK's in a row, I do get that feeling that, "well at least the next one's on them."

"During Robert Lang’s time in Detroit, he caused me anguish. Other times he brought me and my family great joy. Robert Lang occasionally coasts, and spends time searching for the best pane of glass to best view the reflection of his flowing mullet. Other times he is a strong-armed force with the puck. I never knew what to expect from Robert Lang. He is The Enigma. " - A2Y